https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784133 In a CIRP concerning a mixed-use real estate project, the dominant issue was whether the SC should invoke Article 142 to craft a court-monitored resolution mechanism to ensure equity among competing stakeholders and protect homebuyers' rights, notwithstanding the ordinary CIRP architecture. Relying on the amicus curiae's recommendations, the SC held that stakeholders' competing assertions warranted a supervised framework aligned with the IBC's objectives, and that the case's peculiar facts justified exercise of Article 142 to do complete justice; accordingly, it directed constitution of a court-appointed committee to ensure continuity of the resolution process under judicial oversight, and posted the matter for further consideration. en-us Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Dec 2025 09:27:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784133 In a CIRP concerning a mixed-use real estate project, the dominant issue was whether the SC should invoke Article 142 to craft a court-monitored resolution mechanism to ensure equity among competing stakeholders and protect homebuyers' rights, notwithstanding the ordinary CIRP architecture. Relying on the amicus curiae's recommendations, the SC held that stakeholders' competing assertions warranted a supervised framework aligned with the IBC's objectives, and that the case's peculiar facts justified exercise of Article 142 to do complete justice; accordingly, it directed constitution of a court-appointed committee to ensure continuity of the resolution process under judicial oversight, and posted the matter for further consideration. Case-Laws IBC Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784133